When comparing maneuver ratings of Japanese bombers and US fighters, the former have higher ratings then the latter i.e.Betty 24 vs Aircobra's 19. How can that be? Is bomber's maneuver rating used in a different way during air combat than the fighter one?

P-39 was "dog" (aka BAD) as fighter. Overloaded, under-powered and lacking supercharger. Betty was light and fast, but without structural integrity and prone to burst in flames (lot of fuel, no armour, no self-sealing thanks).

ORIGINAL: Yaab When comparing maneuver ratings of Japanese bombers and US fighters, the former have higher ratings then the latter i.e.Betty 24 vs Aircobra's 19. How can that be? Is bomber's maneuver rating used in a different way during air combat than the fighter one?

I think maneur of LBA counted in different manner then fighter vs fighter combat.

ORIGINAL: Yaab When comparing maneuver ratings of Japanese bombers and US fighters, the former have higher ratings then the latter i.e.Betty 24 vs Aircobra's 19. How can that be? Is bomber's maneuver rating used in a different way during air combat than the fighter one?

I think maneur of LBA counted in different manner then fighter vs fighter combat.

Oh dear, what rubbish. According to my sources the best P39-Pilot of the Red airforce downed 48 planes with a P39 (later series, not the planes you´ll use in WITPAE. But in case you use Soviet sources: They managed to shoot down about 75000 Me109. That was an astonishing result especially because there were only 25000 Me109 built. (source: Interview with Hartmann, quotet from "Mit Schwertern und Brillianten")

AFAIK the bomber MVR rating is used only after the bombing run to avoid flak, and possibly fighters. Probably it depends on bomber type(level/tb/db) and attack type and altitude too. In practice I dont think it makes much difference, so you can pretty much ignore it.

who would win in a turning dogfight between an Avro Vulcan and an F-104 starfighter?

The Canberra was the original British high altitude-tight turns bomber. Its skill at out-turning everything at high altitude is a large part of the explanation for its longevity and its usefulness in recce versions.

ORIGINAL: Yaab When comparing maneuver ratings of Japanese bombers and US fighters, the former have higher ratings then the latter i.e.Betty 24 vs Aircobra's 19. How can that be? Is bomber's maneuver rating used in a different way during air combat than the fighter one?

I think maneur of LBA counted in different manner then fighter vs fighter combat.

Oh dear, what rubbish. According to my sources the best P39-Pilot of the Red airforce downed 48 planes with a P39 (later series, not the planes you´ll use in WITPAE. But in case you use Soviet sources: They managed to shoot down about 75000 Me109. That was an astonishing result especially because there were only 25000 Me109 built. (source: Interview with Hartmann, quotet from "Mit Schwertern und Brillianten")

Well Frank, pilots are prone to inflation, much like the economy! All you have to do is look at my pilots in my current game!!!! More claims made than the California gold rush could generate!

When comparing maneuver ratings of Japanese bombers and US fighters, the former have higher ratings then the latter i.e.Betty 24 vs Aircobra's 19. How can that be? Is bomber's maneuver rating used in a different way during air combat than the fighter one?

The A2A code, as I understand it, has a two-tiered test for which aircraft has the advantage (and can attack) after mission (sweep vs CAP, or CAP versus escort) altitude and pilot experience are tested. The two tests are made in sequence, speed and then manueverability. The faster aircraft has a chance to reduce the slower aircraft's manuever rating by half for resolution of who is the attacker and who is the defender. This is one of the key reasons the Hurricane so often mops the floor with Oscars. The Hurricane is apparantly enough faster to consistently reduce the Oscars manuever rating by half--resulting in a value just below that of the Hurry. With the high gun value of some of the Hurry variants and the fragile structure of the Oscar, one dead Oscar. Same is true for the Hellcat vs the A6M5s.

That being said, in fighter versus bomber combat, if the fighter is fast enough and high enough with a sufficently experience pilot, it gets to attack and the maneuver rating is not considered.

ORIGINAL: Yaab When comparing maneuver ratings of Japanese bombers and US fighters, the former have higher ratings then the latter i.e.Betty 24 vs Aircobra's 19. How can that be? Is bomber's maneuver rating used in a different way during air combat than the fighter one?

I think maneur of LBA counted in different manner then fighter vs fighter combat.

The P-39 on the Russian front was not only a late war model but they also fought at low altitude where the planes deficiencies were lessened. The Russians were also in the habit of completely removing the 37mm cannon as they found it to be rather worthless and it helped the planes sluggish performance.

In the Pacific the P-39 and the P-400 had to scramble up to 15-20,000 feet in a few minutes and it simply could not get the job done. The few that were part of the Cactus Air Force were quickly pulled off bomber intercept duty because it could not gain alltitude in time and was slaughtered. Air crews lost morale.

It found a new lease on life when they gave it a new job where they sent it out one at a time or in pairs on low level bombing and strafing runs on Japanese infantry. If it could spot a column marching through the jungle it could usually wreck havoc in short order. The Japanese hated them. It was also useful in interdicting barges and flak suppression when the CAF attacked the Tokyo Express.

It is a mystery that afaik no one answered. It might have to do with how the code handles bombers- unfortunately they do not have altitude mvr variance like fighters so they probably retain the old code- But this is only speculation.

It is a mystery that afaik no one answered. It might have to do with how the code handles bombers- unfortunately they do not have altitude mvr variance like fighters so they probably retain the old code- But this is only speculation.

No need for speculation, it has been answered already (by Erkki).

The bombers don't use mvr for a2a, only for aaa, so comparing the mvr of a P39 to a Betty does not mean anything in game terms.

I wasn't going to post in this thread because like many recent threads, by the time I had read it, adequate answers had already by given by others. However I have noticed a recent trend in the forum where notwithstanding an answer has been given, someone has not been satisfied and has demanded that the already provided answer be "confirmed". Which raises the question, who exactly is qualified to "confirm". Obviously a developer would qualify but for various reasons, developer participation in the forum has dropped off considerably of. An alternative would be for all these people who demand that someone "confirms", instead did their own research for invariably they demand a "confirmation" on a subject matter which has already been "confirmed" in the past by a developer.

As I am not a developer my word that bomber maneouver only relates to bombers avoiding AA will not suffice. Therefore I provide the following thread, which anyone who is not lazy could have found within 10 seconds, where not one, but two developers, "confirm" that bomber maneouvre rating only relates to AA.

No one on this forum has the right to demand a "confirmation", especially when they fail to do their own "diligence". Doing so merely discloses that they do not trust others who go to the trouble to provide an answer. That is not the way to encourage others to help.

And it does not really matter as anyone who regularly plays the game will know that if your p39s catch a group of bettys sans escort, they will eat them alive. So obviously the maneuver rating for bombers vs fighters is not much of a factor in fighter to bomber combat.

No one on this forum has the right to demand a "confirmation", especially when they fail to do their own "diligence". Doing so merely discloses that they do not trust others who go to the trouble to provide an answer. That is not the way to encourage others to help.